[CPProt.net] A word from the (former CODART) director

[MSN CPPnet (Ton Cremers)]

A word from the director

After seven and a half years, it seems safe to say that in CODART the
worldwide network of curators of Dutch and Flemish art has found itself and
become a self-aware institution. That is a good thing for its members and a
good thing for the art in their care. 

As the starting point for a new organization, this is undoubtedly enough.
But to go on, more is needed. Calling the network into being would be an
empty exercise if it did not lead to an improved understanding of its
function. In the broadest sense, curators of Dutch and Flemish art mediate
between the likes of Jan van Eyck, Jan van Scorel, Jan van Goyen and ‘Jan
met de pet,’ the man in the street, today’s audience for art. This in
itself, I am convinced, is forever. What might not be forever is the
tradition of having this function filled by art historians specialized in
Dutch and Flemish art and attached as keepers to a collection. At various
times in the course of our existence, we have heard dire warnings about the
demise of the specialist, in-house curator. I must say that experience over
the past years has not been as bad as all that. A number of museums have
indeed let their scholarly curators go without replacing them, a number of
museum directors have announced the end of what they think of as the
ivory-tower curator, but on the whole our numbers have not been depleted.

As for the notion that attracting large audiences is a task ill-suited to
scholarly curators, I am convinced that museum directors who believe such
things are not going to keep their own jobs for long. What the public
expects from a museum in the first place – and I say first advisedly, with
respect to qualities that come before the café and the museum shop and the
other little thrills of the experience economy – is authority and integrity,
an expert and honest presentation of its collection. In a time marked by
uncertainty about values, a museum provides a stamp of approval for major
cultural worth that is still respected by the world at large. And the
keepers of the seal for that stamp of approval are specialist curators. It
is the quality of your knowledge, your research, your standing in the field
– and yes, your network – that backs up the status of your collections, your
exhibitions, your museums. 

While CODART normally allows us to concentrate on art and on work that we
love, in my final remarks to you as director I feel it necessary to admonish
you to pay attention as well to things we prefer not to think about. In
reviewing the events of the past years, in the Swedish codart year, with the
CODART congress taking place in Haarlem with an excursion to Hoorn, and with
the CODART ZES trip to Boston still fresh in memory, I cannot ignore the
ugly reality that some of the biggest museum stories in all these places
have been thefts. This spring is the 15th anniversary of the unsolved theft
from the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum of paintings by Rembrandt and
Vermeer; Stockholm has still not recovered from the brutal armed robbery
there of an early Rembrandt; the Frans Hals Museum was the victim of a
break-in theft not too long ago; and we even considered scrapping Hoorn from
the program when just two months before codart acht the Westfries Museum
lost to burglars more than 20 of the paintings we wanted to go there to see.

Security is not the primary task of the scholarly curator. However, if you
ever lose part of your collection to thieves, it will affect you deeply,
professionally and also personally. This is reason enough to concern
yourselves with issues of museum security. Under this term I also consider
the hazard of floods and fires. The near-tragedy of the Dresden floods is
very much present, as is the real one in Weimar, with the loss not of a
museum collection but an irreplaceable historical library. Although most of
us enjoy the blessing of living in countries that are not threatened by
military violence or looting, we have the obligation to protect our
collections against dangers of that kind as well. And many of us live in
countries that are participating in the Iraqi war, which has contributed to
the unforgivable degradation of that country’s cultural heritage.

Without urging you to change fields, I do encourage you to speak up within
your museums in favor of adequate security. Sad to say, the standard of what
constitutes adequacy in this regard is rising at a dizzying pace. Do not
underestimate the level of risk. Do not tell yourselves that because art
stolen from museums cannot be sold openly for a number of years, this makes
it unattractive to thieves. Do not fall prey to the negativistic view that
theft cannot be prevented. And above all, do not let financial
considerations stand in the way of good protection. As Ton Cremers, one of
the leading experts in museum security, likes to say in his increasingly
frequent interviews in the media: how is it that museums are always willing
to spend millions to put great art on their walls but are not willing to
spend a few tens of thousands to keep it there? 

Fifteen years ago, the Dutch state faced up to the danger of the physical
decay of art and launched the historical Deltaplan Cultuurbehoud. Beginning
less than one decade ago, museums worldwide were forced to investigate the
provenance of their post-Second World War acquisitions against the danger of
legal and moral loss. (Congratulations are in order for our charter and
board member Rudi Ekkart, whose recommendations in this matter to the Dutch
government were accepted in February 2005, recommendations that we hope will
contribute toward the healing of terrible old wounds.) 

After shoring up our collections through better protocols for conservation
in the Deltaplan and provenance in the Ekkart Committee – I name only the
Dutch examples – the time has come to revamp our thinking with regard to the
security of our collections against theft, fire, flood, terrorism and armed
violence. All such campaigns begin reluctantly, with the intention of
getting away with a minimum of effort and expenditure. In the end they
demand immense outlays of work and money. However, these challenges are more
useful than they seem at first. As soon as museums abandon a defensive,
minimizing attitude and become enthusiastic about preserving their objects
and their right to own them, new value is added to the collection, and the
museum mentality is upgraded. By law, art is nothing but chattel. But to the
museum, the right to own art has to be earned, with a demonstration that it
was acquired fairly and with a commitment to preserving it better than
anyone else. 

These challenges begin outside the scope of the curator’s responsibility,
but quickly impinge on it. And, without congratulating ourselves too much,
it may be noted that curators are often the people in a museum who care most
deeply about the holdings and about the quality of the museum experience for
the visitor. If curators take an active part in discussions of museum
security, the subject will be treated in a different tone, with more respect
for the objects and the public, than if left only to security professionals
and museum administrators. 

This is my last Word from the director. As this issue went to press, it was
announced that I will be succeeded as of 1 July by Gerdien Verschoor. This
is wonderful news, filling me with confidence that CODART is off to a fresh
new start. As webmaster, I will continue to give my best to this vital part
of our program, and count on you to provide me with information and support.
I cannot let this juncture pass without expressing my heartfelt thanks to
all those who helped make codart possible. Our funding has come mainly from
the governments of the Netherlands and Flanders, the Netherlands Institute
for Cultural Heritage and its indispensable treasurer Wim Jacobs. The
wonderful staff of ICN and its directors have provided us with hospitality
and facilities and taken us up as if we were one of them. The board of
CODART, under the wise chairmanship of Henk van der Walle, with Rudi Ekkart
and Paul Huvenne as content providers, has stood behind the organization
through thick and thin. A succession of freelancers has joined us
enthusiastically in parts of our mission. Rachel Esner has been the very
able managing editor of the Courant for half of its existence. The Courant
and our website, www.codart.nl, are given form by Els Kerremans and her
staff at Typography, Interiority and Other Serious Matters, while the
website has achieved its technical superiority through the expert efforts of
Joris van Gelder and his bureau, Occhio.  

Wietske Donkersloot has been my ideal right-hand woman for the past five
years. In this function she has not only excelled at organizational tasks,
but has also grown into the main author of our policy documents. The office
and the front-line work on congresses and study trips have been run with
ability and unfailing high spirits by Navany Almazan.

A special and increasingly important role has been played by the Program
Committee, led and driven on to a high level of accomplishment by Stephen
Hartog. A strong representation of members is the only way to go for an
organization of our kind, and we are blessed with a self-selecting,
top-flight committee of mid-career heavyweights. The membership as a whole,
especially those who were faithful attendants of the congresses and study
trips, is the real foundation of codart. Without the willingness on the part
of the members to acknowledge the need for mutual cooperation and support,
and to devote time and money to our common project, there would be no
codart.

Behind the scenes from the start, discussing with me intensively every
aspect of codart, its activities and aspirations, has been my partner in
life and love, Loekie Schwartz. To her I gratefully dedicate my directorship
of an institution very dear to me.

Gary Schwartz